B.N.SHUKLA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the deceased is son-in-law of the applicant and there was no motive or intention on the part of the ap ­plicant to commit murder. The FIR was lodged after one month from the date of alleged incident. It is further contended that at the time of inquest family members of the deceased were present and in the statement of Mathura Prasad it has come that in saving the deceased his neck was pressed and he became unconscious and succumbed to the injuries in the way to hospital.
(2.) LEARNED A.G.A. contended that the applicant was also involved in committing murder of the deceased. Perused the statement of the wit ­nesses. The FIR was lodged after one month of the alleged incident. There was no intention or motive on the part of the applicant to commit murder. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 23.9.2010.
(3.) CONSIDERING the nature of accusa ­tion and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tem ­pering of the witnesses and prima facie sat ­isfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be re ­leased on bail.;